12,284 research outputs found
Epistemic Foundation of Stable Model Semantics
Stable model semantics has become a very popular approach for the management
of negation in logic programming. This approach relies mainly on the closed
world assumption to complete the available knowledge and its formulation has
its basis in the so-called Gelfond-Lifschitz transformation.
The primary goal of this work is to present an alternative and
epistemic-based characterization of stable model semantics, to the
Gelfond-Lifschitz transformation. In particular, we show that stable model
semantics can be defined entirely as an extension of the Kripke-Kleene
semantics. Indeed, we show that the closed world assumption can be seen as an
additional source of `falsehood' to be added cumulatively to the Kripke-Kleene
semantics. Our approach is purely algebraic and can abstract from the
particular formalism of choice as it is based on monotone operators (under the
knowledge order) over bilattices only.Comment: 41 pages. To appear in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming
(TPLP
The PITA System: Tabling and Answer Subsumption for Reasoning under Uncertainty
Many real world domains require the representation of a measure of
uncertainty. The most common such representation is probability, and the
combination of probability with logic programs has given rise to the field of
Probabilistic Logic Programming (PLP), leading to languages such as the
Independent Choice Logic, Logic Programs with Annotated Disjunctions (LPADs),
Problog, PRISM and others. These languages share a similar distribution
semantics, and methods have been devised to translate programs between these
languages. The complexity of computing the probability of queries to these
general PLP programs is very high due to the need to combine the probabilities
of explanations that may not be exclusive. As one alternative, the PRISM system
reduces the complexity of query answering by restricting the form of programs
it can evaluate. As an entirely different alternative, Possibilistic Logic
Programs adopt a simpler metric of uncertainty than probability. Each of these
approaches -- general PLP, restricted PLP, and Possibilistic Logic Programming
-- can be useful in different domains depending on the form of uncertainty to
be represented, on the form of programs needed to model problems, and on the
scale of the problems to be solved. In this paper, we show how the PITA system,
which originally supported the general PLP language of LPADs, can also
efficiently support restricted PLP and Possibilistic Logic Programs. PITA
relies on tabling with answer subsumption and consists of a transformation
along with an API for library functions that interface with answer subsumption
A Parameterised Hierarchy of Argumentation Semantics for Extended Logic Programming and its Application to the Well-founded Semantics
Argumentation has proved a useful tool in defining formal semantics for
assumption-based reasoning by viewing a proof as a process in which proponents
and opponents attack each others arguments by undercuts (attack to an
argument's premise) and rebuts (attack to an argument's conclusion). In this
paper, we formulate a variety of notions of attack for extended logic programs
from combinations of undercuts and rebuts and define a general hierarchy of
argumentation semantics parameterised by the notions of attack chosen by
proponent and opponent. We prove the equivalence and subset relationships
between the semantics and examine some essential properties concerning
consistency and the coherence principle, which relates default negation and
explicit negation. Most significantly, we place existing semantics put forward
in the literature in our hierarchy and identify a particular argumentation
semantics for which we prove equivalence to the paraconsistent well-founded
semantics with explicit negation, WFSX. Finally, we present a general proof
theory, based on dialogue trees, and show that it is sound and complete with
respect to the argumentation semantics.Comment: To appear in Theory and Practice of Logic Programmin
Towards the implementation of a preference-and uncertain-aware solver using answer set programming
Logic programs with possibilistic ordered disjunction (or LPPODs) are a recently defined logic-programming framework based on logic programs with ordered disjunction and possibilistic logic. The framework inherits the properties of such formalisms and merging them, it supports a reasoning which is nonmonotonic, preference-and uncertain-aware. The LPPODs syntax allows to specify 1) preferences in a qualitative way, and 2) necessity values about the certainty of program clauses. As a result at semantic level, preferences and necessity values can be used to specify an order among program solutions. This class of program therefore fits well in the representation of decision problems where a best option has to be chosen taking into account both preferences and necessity measures about information. In this paper we study the computation and the complexity of the LPPODs semantics and we describe the algorithm for its implementation following on Answer Set Programming approach. We describe some decision scenarios where the solver can be used to choose the best solutions by checking whether an outcome is possibilistically preferred over another considering preferences and uncertainty at the same time.Postprint (published version
Abduction in Well-Founded Semantics and Generalized Stable Models
Abductive logic programming offers a formalism to declaratively express and
solve problems in areas such as diagnosis, planning, belief revision and
hypothetical reasoning. Tabled logic programming offers a computational
mechanism that provides a level of declarativity superior to that of Prolog,
and which has supported successful applications in fields such as parsing,
program analysis, and model checking. In this paper we show how to use tabled
logic programming to evaluate queries to abductive frameworks with integrity
constraints when these frameworks contain both default and explicit negation.
The result is the ability to compute abduction over well-founded semantics with
explicit negation and answer sets. Our approach consists of a transformation
and an evaluation method. The transformation adjoins to each objective literal
in a program, an objective literal along with rules that ensure
that will be true if and only if is false. We call the resulting
program a {\em dual} program. The evaluation method, \wfsmeth, then operates on
the dual program. \wfsmeth{} is sound and complete for evaluating queries to
abductive frameworks whose entailment method is based on either the
well-founded semantics with explicit negation, or on answer sets. Further,
\wfsmeth{} is asymptotically as efficient as any known method for either class
of problems. In addition, when abduction is not desired, \wfsmeth{} operating
on a dual program provides a novel tabling method for evaluating queries to
ground extended programs whose complexity and termination properties are
similar to those of the best tabling methods for the well-founded semantics. A
publicly available meta-interpreter has been developed for \wfsmeth{} using the
XSB system.Comment: 48 pages; To appear in Theory and Practice in Logic Programmin
- …